Traditional shaped or whole log constructed buildings are common throughout the world. In such buildings, solid or shaped logs are placed one on top of the other to build up the external or perhaps even internal wall structure. Traditionally the gap between the logs, or chink joint (chinking joint) would be filled or sealed, closing the external structural of the building. Following this sealing step, various internal and/or external finishing embellishments may be added as desired. While shaped or whole log buildings were initially constructed due to the limitations of then existing construction techniques and materials, such traditional log homes have most recently been replaced with more efficient frame structures. However, due to various visual and functional aspects of such shaped and/or whole log constructed buildings, there remains a strong demand within the market to combine modern frame construction techniques with traditional shaped or whole log aesthetics.
The industries first attempts to hybridize conventional and log building construction techniques involving shaped log siding where elongated panels would be placed horizontally along the outer surface of a pre-fabricated wall. In some instances a rounded or curved structure simulating a log surface appearance would be attached to such a panel. However, such siding systems have several drawbacks, namely that the aesthetic appearance of these “simulated” surfaces to not give the appearance of authentic log construction. This is especially apparent at the buildings corners where the elongated panels intersect and terminate. As a result, a variety of corner systems have been developed to simulate the corner intersection of such structures. Many typically employ “false” structures to present the appearance of the tell-tale staggered log intersections.
A prior solution has been the attachment of solid log sections to the sheathing boards at the building corner. This method proved time consuming and costly since each segment of “log” had to be profiled to provide a close fit with its respective siding piece. Another limited solution was the installation of vertical corner posts connecting to horizontal siding as generally described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,277,925 and 5,167,103. However, this approach could not provide wood grain patterns that closely mimic true log construction limiting their functional and aesthetic capabilities. Another approach described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,627,204 and 4,320,610 utilized simulated log pieces or full log end pieces arranged in a vertical column and secured to the corner of the building to simulate the look of full log cornet joint. Similarly, in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,096,674 and 2,005,921 false mortise and tenon structures were secured to a building corner to present the appearance of a full log structure. However each such method has been limited in its industry adoption due to the increased complexity and cost as well as un-realistic appearance.
Another potential solution was proposed in U.S. Pat. No. 1,996,735 which related to construction with horizontal siding units and corner blocks made to resemble saddle-V notches. The siding was nailed both to the frame and to the corner block and the joint between the corner block and siding was a mitered 45-degree angle, which chips out in the in-grain block. Finally, a more recent approach found in U.S. Pat. No. 6,427,414 secured corner pieces with internally positioned splines into a specific cut-out on alternating horizontally placed boards that were attached though specific H-joints to a prefabricated surface and using a chamber to hide the a corner joint and lack of grain continuity. However, again, such approach required additional and complicated steps and require a chambered structure which is inconsistent with more traditional log-construction aesthetics.
The foregoing problems and limitations regarding conventional corner systems for shaped and log construction techniques may represent a long-felt need for a simple and cost-effective solution that preserves the traditional log-construction aesthetic. In addition, such systems do not address a simple and cost-effective solution for creating a false chinking joint which may further be engineered to be pliant such that it may aid in making it more resistant to water penetration and expansion as well as other stresses that might damage the joint structure. While implementing elements may have been available as shown above, actual attempts to meet this need may have been lacking to some degree. This may have been due to a failure of those having ordinary skill in the art to fully appreciate or understand the nature of the problems and challenges involved. As a result of this lack of understanding, attempts to meet these long-felt needs may have failed to effectively solve one or more of the problems or challenges here identified. These attempts may even have led away from the technical directions taken by the present inventive technology and may even result in the achievements of the present inventive technology being considered to some degree an unexpected result of the approach taken by some in the field. As such, the current inventive technology provides a single comprehensive solution, which in some embodiments is expressed throughout.